News

Photo Gallery

Just Guns - NEWS ITEMS

This is an editorial page and is not intended to be solely political in nature. Gun issues as a mere topic however, happen to involve political influences, good and
bad. This section is intended to provide recent events involving guns in a positive light. Since the club is, in fact, basically a firearms oriented
organization, and since gun rights are constantly under attack, the webmaster has opted to provide some editorial information, MOSTLY in the form of other media articles ... and again, articles that
are pro-gun, of course.

This section is not intended to insult or otherwise malign any political party or politician, but it will at times show various entities and/or persons in the light that they cast upon
themselves. Such is the nature of politics and news.

MARYLAND TRAVEL WARNING!!

Do you have a PA "Protection Permit," or any other state's concealed carry permit? In Maryland, they are NOT RECOGNIZED!! If you have an NRA decal, or other sport/hunting
decals on your car, with PA, VA, or WV plates, the police are known to find a reason to stop you!

They
WILL ask if you have any firearms, and if you do, you WILL BE ARRESTED! They are also known to "find a reason," (probable cause) to SEARCH you and your vehicle - usually by having a K9 alert on you
or your vehicle. The NRA is fighting two cases.

If a
gun owner is stopped while driving into Maryland, and disclose that they do have a firearm to the police who stop them, they will be arrested. That means the person
must later return to the State of Maryland for court, because their penalties are much more stringent than others, especially surrounding states like Pennsylvania, Virginia, and West
Virginia.

In
states where the carry conceal licensing permits are distinctly different than in Maryland, a person cannot just carry concealled – even the exceptions to Maryland law, has made it
illegal for law enforcement, both
current and former law enforcement on state and federal levels. Even the permits under the LEO (Law Enforcement Officer's Safety Act) may result in detention and arrest.

John Tonnesen IV of Lake Worth, Florida, was pulled over and arrested after a search of his work truck — by the same
officer who stopped Mr. Filippidis — turned up his .45-caliber Ruger, licensed in the state of Florida. He doesn’t believe the stop was coincidental.

“It was unloaded and stuffed into a bag far from me,”
Mr. Tonnesen told The Times. “There’s scanners in Maryland that scan every tag, and Florida is one of their target vehicles. They’ll find whatever reason they can to pull you over.”

“The MDTA Police conducted a review of the traffic stop and have concluded that the stop and subsequent search of the vehicle were justified,” spokesman Jonathan Green wrote in an
emailed statement. “The investigation did not reveal any violations of law or agency policy.”

The officer who stopped both gun owners is “assigned to the I-95 corridor where there is a large volume of out of state travelers,” Mr. Green said.

Baltimore-based
criminal defense lawyer Paul Kramer says these type of stops and searches happen far too often in Maryland and are a waste of taxpayer money. Mr. Kramer represented a Pennsylvania security officer
who was pulled over in the state for speeding. The Maryland officer asked Mr. Kramer’s client whether he had a gun in the car, and once the man acknowledged he did, the officer arrested him for
having the gun and the cartridge in the same locked container — not separated, as per Maryland law.

“You think that Maryland would honor legitimate people with guns rather than charging people who are legitimately carrying but doing it incorrectly,” said Mr. Kramer, who was former
deputy U.S. attorney for Maryland. “I would think that the police would want to take the time to go after those people who don’t have a legitimate right to have a gun rather than locking up people
who have a valid license.

Note: Summit Township Sportsman's Club does not necessarily endorse any firearm This review is provided only becasue
Springfield Armory recently decided to produce a version of the AR (Automatic Rifle - NOT "Assault Weapon").

For the GunBroker.com article, click on the above photo.

For the YouTube video of the review, copy & paste this link into your browser:

Powerful Video produced by the NRA (National Rifle Association). You need to be aware of this
as a citizen of the U.S.A.

Sheriff Larry Dever, (white cowboy hat and blue/white checkered shirt) is the long time
sheriff of Cochise County .

Cochise County is huge and borders Sonora, Mexico .

The bald-headed guy is the Sheriff of Pinal County . North of Tucson ,
AZ.

Powerful!! And absolutely factual!

CLICK FOR VIDEO

HOME INVASION!
So, tell me WHY do we common citizens do NOT need a gun again?

Of all places ... MARYLAND, shortly after their brain-dead Governor passed an even MORE stingent law that affects even licenses gun owners. In this case, the home invaders
picked the WRONG house, thinking he was just some guy too old to defend himself!

AR-15

With all the talk about banning "assault rifles," it's painfully clear that the anti-gun crowd uses the term to vilify a perfectly legitimate rifle. "AR" does NOT ... repeat, does
NOT mean "assault rifle!"

﻿

AR- 15

The AR-15 is a common rifle. Very similar in looks to an M-16, but not exactly. AR does NOT stand for Assault Rifle, as is commonly believed. AR stands for the original company that manufactured it, ArmaLite. ArmaLite
sold their rights to the AR-10 and AR-15 designs in 1959 to Colt. It stands for ArmaLite Rifle.

With a simple barrel and receiver switch, this rifle can fire 14 different calibers and sizes of ammunition, ranging from .22LR to .50BMG.

Completely customizable, this rifle can also be a personal defense firearm at less than 36 inches long, to a sniper rifle over 50 inches.

Standard magazine (NOT "clip") is 30 rounds, but aftermarket 5, 10, 20, 30, 40, 60, 90, and 100 round magazines are available as well, but only the 5 round, non-detachable magazine
is legal in California. In California, these magazines are breech loaded, and do NOT come off. The reason for this is because of the Assault Weapon Ban that The Clinton Administration put
into affect, and this method of semi-automatic action slows the loading process and is supposed to reduce murders. All it did was boost illegal weapon sales.

With the modular accessory rail, hundreds of different aftermarket accessories are available. These range from simple, and relatively cheap in price, tac-lights, vertical secondary pistol grips,to
night-sights, to bipods, to thermal scopes, to night-vision scopes and infrared scopes beyond normal mag-scopes with somewhere around 20+ compatible scopes. Other accessories are different stocks,
from collapsibles to solid body, to skeleton, to adjustables.

These rifles, when sighted in are accurate up to 500 yards, with a range well beyond that.

The semi-automatic feed uses a direct gas impingement system. (If lost with this term, use wikipedia.)

This rifle was designed by Eugene Stoner in 1958 as an updated, lighter version of the AR-10. The design was initially submitted as a new rifle for the US Armed Forces, and is what the M-16 was based
off of.

Overall, this is a very effective weapon for home defense, hunting, sharpshooting, and just fun at the range.

Possible calibers for the AR-15 are:

.223REM
5.56x45mm NATO
(Yes, the NATO round is different from a .223REM. The NATO round has higher power, and needs mods to the weapon to be fired safely. Commonly confused and called the same as .223REM, because they have
the same physical dimensions but different power levels)
.22LR
6.5 Grendel
6.8SPC
.45 Bushmaster
.300 Whisper
.458SOCOM
9mm Parabellum
7.62x39mm
.50AE
.50 Beowulf
.50BMG
(All these .50s are different power ratings and dimensions, but the bullet itself is the same size.)
.45ACP

What makes an AR evil (in the eyes of anti-gunners like Diane Feinstein)?

Collapsable stock which is ideal for hunters, both for easier transport/packing, and for trapsing through the woods to a favored hunting spot.

Pistol grip that, according to anti-gunners, makes it easier for criminals to fire the weapon. Criminals? ONLY criminals?

30-round magazine. As any real marksman knows, MUCH more devastation can be accomplished form hundreds of yards away with a good hunting rifle and scope. Only uninformed (or deranged)
individuals would chose an AR rifle. Give a good marksman a Remington 700 and scope, and multiple dozens of victims could be the result. Just ask the VC who tried to overrun Gunnery
Sergeant Carlos Hathcock in Vietnam! Well, no ... there were none left to ask!

The evil bayonet lug! Frankly, they just COME with most AR-15's for that "look." Useful? Well, I suppose it makes a good way to set the rifle down in camp ... stick it in the
ground instead of putting it on the butt against something. Other than that ... ? Not much use!

Using the anti-gun logic that it "looks to military," we should ban Hummers too, because, by golly, they LOOK "too military!"

While some people, even hunters, think that a 30-round magazine is "too much" ammo, it's ideal for defense, and for plinking at the range. Banning them will NOT eliminate them at all.
Those of us who live in the country, with NO police department, may someday wish that we had 30 rounds of capacity. That's an academic ("what if?") discussion though ... but what is the
sense of making LAW-ABIDING people give up their RIGHTS? Does anyone really think a criminal, or deranged person will obey ANY law? REALLY? The recent spat of shootings, go far
beyond banning certain firearms ... and banning them will not solve anything. What then ... how about?

Civil AND criminal liability for not ensuring firearms are NOT accessible to family members who may be not all there?

Civil AND criminal libability for leaving any firearm unsecured ... such as left in an automobile's glovebox, or under a seat; UNSECURED?

Prosecuting those who DO violate the law, and not punishing those who OBEY the law, or violating their rights? That'd be a nifty concept, wouldn't it?

Mental health - obviously something needed there; but wow, what a slippery slope that COULD be as well.

Mandatory basic NRA courses, and state law reviews prior to issuiing ANY "Protection Permits," or so-called concealed carry permits ... OR proof of such training (prior police and specific
military backgrounds)?

There are MANY common sense approaches to minimizing gun violence, but punishing law abiding citizens, is NOT acceptable! Please, write or call
your Congressional and Senate Representatives ... or you just may LOSE YOUR RIGHTS under the Constitution's Bill of Rights!

Frankly, ANY law that violates the 2nd Amendment ... in MY mind, is NOT a legitimate law, and I for one, will NOT obey ANY such travesty.

Customer Stops Grocery Store Robbery By Shooting Suspect, Police Say

Two Men In Police Custody

Embed this Video

MILWAUKEE --It's the first known case of a concealed carry permit holder in Wisconsin shooting someone, and it happened in the middle of a Milwaukee
grocery store, where a customer stopped two men from robbing the store by shooting one of them, Milwaukee police said.

It was just after 7 p.m. Monday when two men stormed into the Aldi at 76th Street and Villard Avenue. Police said at least one of them was waving a shotgun, despite the presence of two
unarmed security guards.

Still, they couldn't have counted on a customer legally carrying a concealed handgun, who opened fire on them.

Milwaukee police responded to the report of an armed robbery and shooting, only it turned out the shooter wasn't one of the robbers.

One of the suspects, a 20-year-old man, was shot and is being treated at an area hospital. He and the other suspect are in police custody. Police believe they're linked to a string
of similar robberies.

Right across the street from the Aldi, Larry Rowell's Hart Automotive has been victimized recently, too. Last weekend, wheels and rims were stolen from a vehicle in his lot. He
also just got his concealed carry permit.

"Have you ever thought about what you would do if you were in the same situation? This is right across the street from your business," 12 News reporter Nick Bohr said.

"I would do the exact same thing. If I felt that he was threatening people's lives, I'd use my gun on him, too," Rowell said.

The store has a sign when walking in stating, "Weapons of any kind are prohibited." But that in itself doesn't factor into whether the shooter would face any charges.

All citizens have the right to use force when protecting themselves or others from great bodily harm -- something the district attorney will discuss with the customer about
Wednesday.

Rowell said his mind is already made up.

"I'm really happy because now the criminals are going to be afraid, because who knows who's going to conceal carry, or have a weapon on them. Nobody's going to know if the other
guy has a gun now, so it levels the playing field," Rowell said.

Aldi released a statement Tuesday afternoon: "Aldi is fully cooperating with the local law enforcement with its investigation and cannot comment at this time. We are thankful that no
customers or employees were injured."

Criminal charges are not considered likely against the customer who shot at the suspects.

The case against the two suspects will be reviewed Wednesday and charges there are considered much more likely.

On the Second Amendment, Obama Budget Tells All

Barack Obama’s careful effort to hide his anti-Second Amendment agenda is starting to come undone. The latest evidence is found in the budget he sent to Congress
this past week.

As we reported last fall, NRA was very successful in having a number of provisions included in the annual spending bills that are important protections for our rights. Obama grudgingly
signed the Fiscal Year 2012 spending bills that contained those “riders,” although in his signing statement, he announced his intent to defy some. Now, in Obama’s FY 2013 budget, he proposes
eliminating many of them outright.

One of the most egregious is the deletion of a provision first added for FY 2012 that prohibits any future “Fast & Furious” style operations. In an official summary, the administration says
the restriction is “not necessary.”

“Not necessary”? Obama may trust Eric Holder and the senior officials at the Department of Justice, but Congress and the American people certainly should not. Holder’s refusal to fully
cooperate with congressional investigations is proof enough that this sort of reckless operation should be specifically banned.

Two other provisions first passed for FY 2012 were also put on the chopping block. One prohibits a ban on the importation of shotguns deemed by the BATFE to be non-“sporting.” Congress
passed this to block an Obama administration plan to expand the use of the “sporting purposes” test once again, this time to ban the importation of many popular defensive, target shooting and hunting
shotguns. Removing this provision is clearly a first step toward implementing a new import ban.

The other new provision for 2012 was a ban on the use of tax dollars to lobby for new gun laws. Obama signaled that he would take this step when he announced at the bill signing for the 2012
legislation that he and his administration would not be bound by that provision. And in his budget, Obama would get rid of that restriction entirely.

Another provision deleted was a prohibition on the use of funds for anti-gun research at the National Institutes of Health and the Centers for Disease Control. These prohibitions have been
passed by Congress to stop these groups from funding junk science “studies” in support of new restrictions on gun rights.

Obama also wants to get rid of the provision that stops the Department of Defense from destroying surplus M1 Garands and M1 carbines—a provision that has been in place for over 30 years. And
he wants to drop a provision that stops the destruction of spent military brass. Without these protections, thousands of surplus rifles could be destroyed instead of being sold to law-abiding
Americans through the Civilian Marksmanship Program, and millions of recyclable brass cases will be melted down as scrap rather than being made available to reloaders.

There is good news for gun owners, though. No one—not even Obama or his closest allies—believe this budget will be passed, and it may not even be brought up for a vote.

So why oppose these provisions now? Is it an election-year signal to his anti-gun base voters? Or is he finally showing his true beliefs and giving up his pretense of support for the
Second Amendment? Whatever the answer may be, gun owners should expect nothing but more anti-gun action on the part of the Obama Administration.